I need two slides on HR plan Developing as an effective professional in the real food company

Two slides

The first one topic is : The strategic changes for the HR operation.

The second slide : How Andrea would be Implement            

ATTACHED: 

From these three files you will be able to get the information

.......................................................................................................................................................................

 Developing as an effective HR professional in the Real Food Company

Andrea has just joined the Real Food Company as the new HR Business Partner following the company’s buy out by a local businessperson (who is now the new Chief Executive). This is a new role – in the past all HR issues were ‘dealt’ with by the previous Chief Executive whenever problems arose. The new owner decided that a HR Business Partner was needed in order to take a more positive and proactive approach to people management within the organisation, appreciating that people are probably the organisation’s largest source of competitive advantage.

Following a lengthy recruitment and selection process Andrea was appointed despite the fact that she had not worked in a management role before – although she had successfully completed her professional qualifications and has five years of experience as a training adviser. Andrea was very keen to get this job as it involves setting up a new department from scratch and it will give her plenty of opportunities to implement new initiatives. During the interview process the Chief Executive gave some clues about her initial perceptions of the organisation’s key HR issues:  

The most recent staff survey found that 75 per cent of staff were not happy working in the organisation.  

There have been complaints by departmental managers that the first line managers are unproductive.

Levels of sickness absence are 50 per cent higher than the national average.

Levels of staffing are not fairly distributed between departments.

There does not appear to be any formal performance management processes in place.

Pay rates don’t appear to be consistent with what is offered by local rivals.

A challenge of being the first ever HR Business Partner is that a job description doesn’t currently exist...

ACTIVITIES:  

Part one: Complete this in your groups 

1. Andrea has come to you as an HR Consultant, to ask you to give her an outline job description for her new role as HR Partner. Identify at least eight responsibilities that you think should be detailed on her job description.  

2. Andrea has consulted the HR profession map and can see how it will be useful to her now and as part of her ongoing continuing professional development (CPD). She asks you to choose three of the behaviours and three of the knowledge area that you think she should prioritise over her first three to six months.  

Explore the HR profession map available on the CIPD website: http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-profession-map

Discuss which knowledge areas and behaviours you would choose (and why) and give some examples of how it will add value to both Andrea as the HR Business Partner and the organisation.

Part two: Consulting Assignment – In your groups, present an outline of these key areas to the CEO and Andrea  

The Real Food Company has approached you as an HR Consulting Company to help them outline the following areas:

How can Andrea better design the HR Function so that it’s not mainly administrative but is more strategic?

The Role of the HR Business Partner in the Real Food Company and some Key Performance Indicators for this position.

The expectations of different stakeholders of Real Food Company from the HR Business Partner with suggestions of how they can be prioritise and understood better.

What HR challenges currently exist in the Real Food Company,

 discuss how the HR Business Partner should investigate these?

As a HR Business Partner with the Real Food Company, what are some of the strategic changes that you would consider making to the HR Operations. How should Andrea implement this change?

Draw up a PDP for Andrea which would enable her to decide the specific resources and training she should request to progress in her role.

Discuss in your groups the advice that you would offer to Andrea on the areas highlighted above.  

CIPD PROFESSIONAL MAP: CIPD 2019 

 
.....................................................................................................................................................................

HR BUSINESS PARTNERING-KEY POINTS

(CIPD, 2014 )

What is HR business partnering?

HR business partnering is a process whereby HR professionals work closely with business leaders and/or line managers to achieve shared organisational objectives, in particular designing and implementing HR systems and processes that support strategic business aims. This process may involve the formal designation of ‘HR business partners’, that is HR professionals who are embedded within the business, sometimes as part of a wider process of restructuring of the HR function.

However, it is important to note that many varying definitions of HR business partnering exist and, where HR business partners operate, there are wide variations in their role.

• Go to our factsheet on Strategic human resource management

HR business partnering in context

The concept of HR business partnering, or strategic partnering, emerged during the mid-late 1990s, around the time that US business academic Dave Ulrich set out his initial theories for the optimum delivery of HR1. Subsequently, certain aspects of the Ulrich model have come to be depicted as a ‘three-legged stool’ or ‘three-box’ model for HR, although there is an ongoing debate over how his theories should be interpreted and put into practice. Ulrich has also reviewed and further developed his own theories on this issue in subsequent work2. 

The ‘three-legged model’ of HR as perceived by many commentators is based on three key elements - HR business partners, shared HR services and HR centres of excellence - which may be depicted as follows:

• HR business partners (or strategic partners) – senior or key HR professionals working closely with business leaders or line managers, usually embedded in the business unit, influencing and steering strategy and strategy implementation.

• Centres of excellence – usually small teams of HR experts with specialist knowledge of leading-edge HR solutions. The role of centres of excellence is to deliver competitive business advantages through HR innovations in areas such as reward, learning, engagement and talent management.

• Shared services – a single, often relatively large, unit that handles all the routine ‘transactional’ services across the business such as recruitment administration, payroll, absence monitoring and advice on simpler employee relations issues. The remit of shared services is to provide low-cost, effective HR administration. For further information see our factsheet on HR shared service centres.

Key drivers of such change include:  

• Rising expectations of HR. Organisations expect more from HR in terms of contributing to strategy, enabling the execution of business plans, and delivering tangible commercial benefits.

• Accelerating competition. Organisations need HR functions that can deliver skilled, creative, motivated, flexible and committed employees; hence the growth of centres of excellence (for example, specialising in reward or learning and talent development).

• Cost efficiency. The introduction of shared services is seen as particularly important to achieving savings, although these cannot be realised without other roles operating effectively.

In theory, where adopted in its entirety, this model may replace integrated HR teams that conduct the full range of HR activities from administration to developing HR strategy.

Challenges to the HR business partnering model

There are various challenges to the HR business partnering model. Some are issues raised as organisations seek to implement the model. Others question how helpful this model is when considering how best to design an HR function.  

 
Where the model exists, there is a danger that in practice it can create silos in the HR function. A further challenge relates to managing a degree of overlap that often exists between the three strands of HR. For example, although a centre of excellence might in theory handle complex employee relations issues, HR business partners can find themselves entangled in local employee relations issues. 

Several commentators have pointed out that the model should not be regarded as a prescriptive approach and rather organisations may wish to adopt a hybrid or customised version to meet their own business needs. For example, the full-scale implementation of business partnering in the context of the three-box model is generally deemed unsuitable for smaller companies (as it might be impossible for a HR function with only a few staff to be divided up in this way).

Some commentators have criticised the entire concept and terminology of HR business partnering as they believe that HR should be seen as integral to the business rather than working in partnership with it.

CIPD's Next Generation HR work warns against ‘HR orthodoxy’ in considering how best to organise the function. It identifies three ‘savvies’ (business, organisational and contextual) which are required of HR professionals for the function to be most effective and deliver deep organisational insight. These three savvies should also be used to inform decisions about the most appropriate HR architecture (design, systems and processes) for the organisation, Our Next Generation HR: Insight driven report cautions that where the three-legged stool model is used to organise functions, HR’s sphere of influence can be narrowed and there may be less opportunity for teams and individuals to be insight-led. The report has more about design principles for an enabling HR structure organised to drive sustainable performance.

We have extended our Next Generation HR work by conducting further research to examine what it means to be ‘business savvy’ in practice. This project, based upon extensive research with practitioners, identifies four foundations of what it means to be business savvy and accompanying insights and indicators. It can be summarised as: 

• understanding the business model at depth

• generating insight from data and evidence

• connecting with curiosity, purpose and impact

• leading with integrity, consideration and challenge.

Business savvy allows practitioners to be fully integrated into the business, pursuing the business and commercial agendas we expect, whilst at the same time maintaining our people and performance strengths. It is also appropriate for all sizes and shapes of organisation and, with adjustments in terms of the organisational focus, for public sector and not-for-profit organisations.

How widespread is HR business partnering?

Despite the intense interest surrounding business partnering and associated HR restructuring, there is relatively little empirical evidence to illustrate the extent to which such approaches have been adopted in practice. This is partly because the varying definitions and interpretations that exist across organisations mean that take-up is difficult to measure.

Our HR Outlook: views of our profession survey report sought to understand more about current HR structures. Nearly 40% of survey participants from large organisations described their HR function structure as the three-legged model (referred to as the Ulrich model) including business partners, specialists and shared services. Among small and medium-sized organisations (less than 250 employees), ‘a single HR team with generalists, specialists and administration together’ was the most common structure, with just under two-thirds reporting they had adopted this model. There are also interesting sector differences, with public sector organisations much more likely to have adopted the three-legged model than private sector organisations.

Role of HR business partners

The role of HR business partners varies widely between organisations. Some activities that HR business partners are likely to be involved in include:

• organisational and people capability building

• longer term resource and talent management planning

• using business insights to drive change in people management practices

• advising on the people implications of organisation change, making recommendations

• intelligence gathering of good people management practices internally and externally, so they can raise issues of which executives may be unaware.

In practice, the activities can vary enormously depending on factors such as organisational size, company culture and business priorities.

When creating and developing HR business partner roles, it is important to consider the knowledge and behaviours required for the position in that particular organisation, bearing in mind that creating the title of HR business partner will not alone create a strategic contribution from the function. The CIPD’s Profession Map sets out the key knowledge, skills and behaviours required of HR professionals at all stages of their career to maximise their impact on business performance.

• Visit the Profession Map

Implementing HR business partnering

Introducing partnering

Organisations contemplating the use of HR business partnering as part of a broader HR transformation agenda should consider the following guidelines: 

• Ensure that there is a clear rationale for the proposed changes and that this is a joint decision between the business and HR.

• Assess and prepare the ground for change, allowing sufficient time to openly discuss partnering and what adjustments are needed both within HR and across the wider business.

• Think through the likely barriers to achieving a smooth transition to the new structures such as potential overlaps in HR delivery and new capabilities required.

Strengthening partnering

It is important that the HR business partnering relationship is reviewed on a regular basis, with steps taken to strengthen partnering through the following measures: 

• Taking an interest in the key business performance measures for example, sales, costs, production, utilisation.

• Ensuring that business partners are involved in the business planning process at the outset and that they are well prepared for planning meetings. This requires spending time reading up on broader economic, social and political trends affecting the business.

• Being able to communicate in the language of the business, in particular discussing key HR metrics and issues in terms of what they mean for business performance, losing HR ‘jargon’.

• Setting the personal objectives of strategic HR partners (and perhaps those in centres of excellence) so that they are aligned to those of managers in the business areas to which they are assigned.

• Using tools such as 360 degree feedback and customer satisfaction surveys to obtain a broad range of views on how well the HR function, including business partners, are fulfilling their role. See our factsheet for more information.

• Building teamwork within HR through, for example, joint projects and peer coaching.

CIPD viewpoint 

Business partnering is a popular and widespread approach to organising the HR function. The segmentation of the HR function into distinct streams may work for some organisations but may create silos. It’s important for HR to remain united as a function, sharing their knowledge and insight from different parts of the organisation, ensuring overall alignment with the business strategy and goals. It’s also essential that if a business partnering model is adopted, the skills and capabilities required of the roles are built into HR development plans as a matter of course.

Overall, the road to HR effectiveness lies in being integrated with the organisation. The whole HR function from top to bottom needs to be business-focused like never before, but it also needs to maintain its focus on people, performance and purpose as outlined in our research. Our continuing research aims to bring to life what these key HR skills and behaviours mean and look like in practice.

References

1. ULRICH, D. (1997) Human resource champions: the next agenda for adding value and delivering results. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

2. See, for example, ULRICH, D. (2011) What's next for HR. Human Resources. April. pp58-60 and ULRICH, D and BROCKBANK, W. (2005) The HR value proposition. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, and ULRICH, D. and BROCKBANK, W. (2008) The business partner model: 10 years on: lessons learned, Human Resources Magazine. December 2008/January 2009.

Extracted from the website: 

http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/factsheets/hr-business-partnering.aspx

Reference:

Cipd.co.uk, (2014). HR business partnering - Factsheets - CIPD. [online] Available at: http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/factsheets/hr-business-partnering.aspx [Accessed 25 May 2015].

......................................................................................................................................................................

Yum! Brands Case Study: Improving the Strategic Performance of the Business through HRM (Society of Human Resource Management, 2007)

How does the largest operator of fast food restaurants in the world stay on top of their competition? By recognizing that understanding and exceeding the needs of their customer starts with building their people capability. Yum! Brands, Inc. is a Fortune 300 company that operates A&W All American Food, KFC, Long John's Silvers , Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell restaurants worldwide. Based in Louisville, Kentucky, Yum! Brands is the world's largest quick-serve restaurant company in terms of system units - nearly 33,000 restaurants around the world in more than 100 countries and territories serve 20 million customers each day. With 850,000 employees across their global operation, one of the biggest challenges for the organization is developing their people capability. According to Tim Galbraith, vice president of People Development at Yum! Brands, organizational success starts with recruiting the most talented people into the organization and once hired, ensuring their success by maximizing their individual potential.

Critical to building an individual's capability within the organization and helping them to understand their strengths and opportunities is a globally instituted 360-feedback process that requires yearly participation from every employee at the store manager level and above. The 360-feedback, also known as a multi-rater survey process, provides employees with performance feedback from direct reports, supervisors, customers and peers. For nearly a decade, Yum! Brands has used 360-feedback to better understand an employee's strengths and to communicate back to the individual about specific opportunities and career development plans.

Initially implemented in-house, the feedback process was difficult to execute and did not produce the results and efficiencies the organization sought, mostly due to the decentralization and administrative complexity of the process. Many local units worked with separate vendors and added or changed items to the survey vehicle, so coordinating completion of the questionnaire in the same timeframe and across the company's various business units proved difficult. Also, because the restaurants are not Web-enabled, the "paper and pencil" element prohibited the organization from having team members below management level participate in the process. Keeping the process in-house also added the additional complexity of having to create software to facilitate the survey process. Both HR and IT agreed that internal resources were better spent developing restaurant software and not 360-feedback software. A better solution to handle the feedback process was needed. Yum! Brands has a qualified staff of Industrial-Organizational psychologists on board and knew they could effectively design their own surveys, but needed a technology partner to streamline the data collection and reporting processes.

"Our survey is fairly unique and contains a large narrative component to allow employee to communicate their thoughts, so we needed a 360 feedback engine where we could insert our 360 feedback instrument," said Galbraith. "We recognized we could not meet the global demands of conducting 360 feedback the way we were managing the process and worked with HR to design an Internet-based survey to use across our employee population." Executed in a compressed, three-week cycle, the feedback process begins with an email communication asking employees to consider who they suggest to complete their survey. From the HR Web site, employees then follow a step-by-step selection process to compile their list of raters. Supervisors have the opportunity to review each list, providing a checks and balances component to ensure those selected are the best choices to provide feedback for that particular individual.

Another improvement this year was managing the international portion of the process. The HR department streamlined the process from country to country, eliminating the multiple costs and was able to provide the business management unit of each country with language translations of the survey for their local region and collect survey data in a timely manner. As a result, Yum! Brands is able to meet their commitment to the people capability piece of their business in an efficient, effective and cost efficient way. During the feedback process, Galbraith notes that they have observed few challenges around accessing the system and more people gaining value from the narrative feedback. Also noted is the improvement in turnaround time between when people fill out the survey and when they receive the finished report.

"The ability to look at the data in a holistic standpoint, because the information is centralized, is very much appreciated," said Galbraith. "Now we can view data in a variety of ways and easily generate reports from a global or local standpoint." Once reports are generated, individuals meet with their supervisors to gain an understanding of their strengths and development opportunities, facilitating performance dialogue. Through the feedback process, employees are provided with a path for promotion and personal growth. "This solution helps us paint a picture of where we are as a company in terms of our capability and bench strength," said Galbraith. "It helps us understand what capabilities we have, what we are missing and where we need to put organizational development efforts."

Development programs such as double staffing and cross training of management enable detailed bench planning at the restaurant level and are used to build individual capability, ensuring the organization is able to have the people capability to meet both their current needs as well as their growth needs. Minimizing movement and churn of employees out of the organization is another strategic imperative. The feedback process helps with retention, creating more stable management teams and ultimately, more successful restaurants." The company measures the percentage of internal promotions and a direct outgrowth of the system includes exceeding the company's goal of 80 percent internal promotions," notes Galbraith. "Likewise, we measure stability and retention and all of those indicators have increased and continue to progress." As the restaurants become Web-enabled, Yum Brands! will be able to take the feedback process to restaurant team members who are responsible for creating positive customer experiences. And engaging employees at the team member level is the next critical area of focus for the organization. "We''re holding onto our employees longer and now we need to make sure they're engaged in our business success," said Galbraith. "We have learned that a strong inward focus has a direct impact on our employees'' ability to generate customer satisfaction, giving us a competitive edge." "The processes around human resource functions are critical to our business success and through our partnership with the HR department, we are able to support the organization's commitment to building our individuals'' people capability for lasting organizational success."

 Question: How has the HR department improved the People Performance of the business-Discuss with specific reference to 5 strategic initiatives and 5 HR indicators.